If you happen to own any watch which uses the ETA 2897 (or simpler ETA 2892), please share your experiences on its daily accuracy, and reliability of power-reserve indicator (for ETA 2897). Thanks in advance.

I have watches that use both movements. The watches are usually within +2 seconds of atomic time, after wearing them for a couple of days. In the five years I've had them I've not had a single problem.

“Education is the inculcation of the incomprehensible into the indifferent by the incompetent”

The ETA 2892-A2 is the most accurate movement ever mass produced, in my experience and by the specs. Unfortunately, they occasionally need service... but all mechanicals exhibit that problem.

"Forever is composed of nows." - Emily Dickinson

"The watch has to be surrounded by a history.
You need more than just a great design. You need to create an atmosphere around the product.
Who is the company behind it? Why are they using this material?
People need to be able to identify the watch with themselves. It's based on emotion." - Ralph Furter

...that's just my opinion and I've been wrong before and will be again and might be now!

I've owned several watches that use the 2892 or a modified 2892 ebauche: 3 Doxas, an Oceaneer, Anonimo, 4 SMPs...
It's been the most accurate mvt I've owned, especially just focusing on the Non-COSC watches like the 3 Doxas, Oceaneer, Anonimo ... They've all been within 2 or 3 secs a day.

If you happen to own any watch which uses the ETA 2897 (or simpler ETA 2892), please share your experiences on its daily accuracy, and reliability of power-reserve indicator (for ETA 2897). Thanks in advance.

The ETA 2892-A2 is the most accurate movement ever mass produced, in my experience and by the specs. Unfortunately, they occasionally need service... but all mechanicals exhibit that problem.

The 5 years on the 2892-a2 service is mandatory because otherwise the ball bearing winding system system is blocking. And no it is not the best nor the most accurate movement ever produced because the rolex 3035 and its derivatives was the most produced certified chronometer from 1977 till 1988 with 300000-500000 units per year and later the 3135 and its derivatives since 1988 was and is still the most produced certified chronometer with 500000-800000 units per year. The 2892-a2 is a good movement that offers a lot for the money but it is nothing stellar nor exceptional.

Omega the sign of Excellence since 1848. Jaeger Le Coultre Horlogerie de Luxe depuis 1833
22 times Olympic games timekeeper, Nasa watch supplier and holder of several world records of precision, Omega has the world's trust
Omega and Rolex for ever
Eterna Nothing but Watchmaking since 1856
Zenith Swiss Watchmaking and Chronometry champion since 1865Hidden ContentHidden ContentHidden ContentHidden ContentHidden Content

The 5 years on the 2892-a2 service is mandatory because otherwise the ball bearing winding system system is blocking. And no it is not the best nor the most accurate movement ever produced because the rolex 3035 and its derivatives was the most produced certified chronometer from 1977 till 1988 with 300000-500000 units per year and later the 3135 and its derivatives since 1988 was and is still the most produced certified chronometer with 500000-800000 units per year. The 2892-a2 is a good movement that offers a lot for the money but it is nothing stellar nor exceptional.

Quantity does not qualify anything , value for money does, not one of my Rolex watches with a 3135 goes more than 4 years without the needs of a service, the rotor winding mechanism on the 3135 is weak and breaks if you drop the watch or hit it hard, the time keeping on all of my 3135's or derivitives is 1 to 4 secs a day and its a good movement but ...

I have several 2892 / 2824 ETA based watches and the 2892 does not break if you drop it, it keeps 1 - 3 secs a day and one is 20 years old and cost 350 usd and has never been serviced it still works 100% and is still 1 sec a day ... Others at more than ten years old are marching on and have been abused beyond belief.

Its solid, works great and its winding mechanism is eons ahead of the Rolex 3135 ... and lets not mention when the 3135 breaks A> How much it cost to fix B> What it does to the bridges when the rotor hits them C> Who is the only company that can get parts D> how long it takes .

Reliabilty of the 2892 is exceptional no question, volumes are most likley higher ( it not limited to one brand remember and not a 100% go for chronomter testing ) than the 3135 and its acuraccy is better or equal to the 3135 ... Cost is less and production is more including the 2824 derivitive no one will doubt that.

Now as an engineer,,, in my book this makes it a better product and it does qualify as an exceptional design for what it is designed to do and at the real cost of doing it.. Unlike the 3130/3135 that cost more and is less reliable.

We use cookies to improve your experience on this website and so that ads you see online can be tailored to your online browsing interests. We use data about you for a number of purposes explained in the links below. By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of data and cookies.Tell me more | Cookie Preferences